Antiquities Act Archives - Page 5 of 17

President Trump’s Monument Rightsizing: Myth vs. Fact

December 4, 2017 — The following was released by the House Committee on Natural Resources Chairman Rob Bishop:

Panic is gripping the Left. The President of the United States apparently has the audacity to enforce the Antiquities Act as it is written: he dares to confine monuments “to the smallest area compatible with proper care and management of the objects to be protected.”

President Trump has rightsized Bears Ears (BENM) and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monuments, and now special interest groups will again attempt to lie, distort and, misrepresent their way to another ill-gotten political victory at the expense of local communities.

Here’s what they’ll say, and here’s why they’re wrong.

MYTH: The President’s actions are illegal.

FACT: False. Propagators of this particular myth put themselves in the absurd position of claiming that one unilateral presidential action can bind every successor in perpetuity. If this seems more reminiscent of an autocracy than a constitutional democracy responsive to the demands of the people, that’s because it is. Not only canpresidents scale back monuments, they have done so on at least 18 other occasions. Two examples: President Taft reduced his own monument by 89% and Woodrow Wilson shrank Teddy Roosevelt’s by 50%.

MYTH: The President’s actions are unpopular.

FACT: Mischaracterization. Unpopular with whom? While many people, separated from the consequences, may support the monuments, the affected communities have been staunchly opposed to excessively large designations. For example in BENM, the San Juan County Commission, the state legislature, the local chapter of the Navajo Nation, the Governor, and every member of the state’s congressional delegation fought the original designation tooth and nail.

MYTH: The President’s actions represent another broken promise to tribes.

FACT: Wrong. It’s important to note that tribal support for the monument was not unanimous. Regardless, the original BENM proclamation did not bestow legal co-management, nor did it ever have the authority to do so. The council created by Obama’s designation had only an advisory role and no official decision-making power. Congress will act to provide legally enforceable tribal co-management.

MYTH: The President’s actions are an attack on our country’s treasured national parks.

FACT: Not true. Attempts to blur the distinctions between national monuments and national parks are fear-mongering lies. No national parks were under review and no national parks were reduced. National monuments and parks are unrelated classifications.

MYTH: The President’s actions will hurt local economies.

FACT: Incorrect. Most monuments, which are created without congressional consultation, lack the infrastructure to support public access and a robust tourism economy, while simultaneously stifling traditional economic uses. The Grand Staircase national monument designation, for example, resulted in a $9M loss to the local economy, according to a study conducted by Utah State University.

MYTH: The President’s actions are a boondoggle for the oil and gas industry.

FACT: Wrong. The land in question remains in federal ownership and subject to the same rigorous environmental reviews all such land undergoes. In any case, there really aren’t economically recoverable oil and gas resources in BENM. Framing this debate as energy vs. protection may be a useful cudgel for litigation activists, but that doesn’t make it accurate.

MYTH: The President’s actions will harm conservation in the area.

FACT: Way off. The Antiquities Act was never meant to be a landscape conservation tool. It was designed to protect antiquities. President Trump’s proclamation maintains protections for bona fide antiquities while respecting traditional land uses. These communities, more attached to the land than anyone, have been maintaining the land for generations.

MYTH: The President’s actions will leave antiquities and resources without any protections.

FACT: Nope. Everyone is concerned about looting and desecration of antiquities or sensitive areas. Here’s a novel idea: rather than focusing exclusively on these particular lands, what if we protected all antiquities on federal lands? Great idea, right? In fact, Congress has already done just that. In 1979 Congress passed the Archaeological Resources Protection of Act (ARPA). ARPA gave the federal government the power to impose severe fines and even imprisonment for looting. It protects ALL federal lands, with or without monument designation.

Learn more about the House Committee on Natural Resources by visiting their site here.

Bishop Statement on President Trump Protecting Antiquities in Utah, Addressing Past Executive Abuse

December 4, 2017 — WASHINGTON — The following was released by the House Committee on Natural Resources:

House Committee on Natural Resources Chairman Rob Bishop (R-UT) issued the following statement:

“I applaud President Trump for recognizing the limitations of the law. Americans of all political stripes should commend him for reversing prior administrations’ abuses of the Antiquities Act and instead exercising his powers within the scope of authority granted by Congress.

“These new proclamations are a first step towards protecting identified antiquities without disenfranchising the local people who work and manage these areas. The next steps will be to move beyond symbolic gestures of protection and create substantive protections and enforcement and codify in law a meaningful management role for local governments, tribes and other stakeholders.”

REMINDER:

Tomorrow, at 11:00 AM EST, Chairman Rob Bishop (R-UT), Rep. Chris Stewart (R-UT) and Rep. John Curtis (R-UT) will host a Pen & Pad to discuss President Trump’s visit to Utah and the introduction of related legislation. For reporters outside of Washington, D.C. there will be a call in number. In order to join in person or via phone, you must RSVP.

WHAT:

Pen & Pad with Chairman Bishop, Reps. Stewart and Curtis

WHEN:

Tuesday, December 5
11:00 AM EST

WHERE:

CALL:

TBD

Number: 1-888-998-7893

Passcode: PROTECTION

To RSVP, please contact Katie Schoettler at katie.schoettler@mail.house.gov.

Fight Over New England Marine Monument Continues

November 27, 2017 — On April 26, President Donald Trump ordered a review of two dozen national monuments created or expanded since 1996, which includes the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts that was created in the last days of the Obama administration. The monument, the first of its kind in the Atlantic Ocean, bans fishing, and oil, gas and mineral exploration within its boundaries.

In September, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke recommended to Trump that the monument, located about 130 miles southeast of Cape Cod, be opened to commercial fishing. Zinke’s memo stated that instead of prohibiting commercial fishing, the government should allow it in the area under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, which is the primary law governing the United States’ marine fisheries and meant to prevent overfishing and guarantee a safe source of seafood.

Conservationists opposed Zinke’s recommendation, while fishing groups supported it.

“They act like this area is all pristine and never touched,” said Massachusetts Lobstermen’s Association President Arthur “Sooky” Sawyer of the current protections. “Lobstermen have been fishing in those areas for the last 50-plus years with no negative effect on the marine species.”

The association is one of a handful of commercial fishing groups in an ongoing lawsuit that claims the Antiquities Act of 1906 only allows the president to create or expand monuments on land, not in the marine environment as Obama did.

Read the full story at the Cape Cod Times

In Congress, an effort to curtail national monuments

October 18, 2017 — WASHINGTON — On Oct. 11, the House Natural Resources Committee approved a proposal from its chairman, Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, to overhaul the Antiquities Act. Bishop’s “National Monument Creation and Protection Act” would severely constrain the power of the president to designate national monuments. It would limit the size of monuments a president could designate as well as the kinds of places protected.

The 1906 Antiquities Act allows a president to act swiftly to protect federal lands facing imminent threats without legislation getting bogged down in Congress. Many popular areas, including Zion, Bryce and Arches national parks in Bishop’s home state, were first protected this way.

Under Bishop’s legislation, any proposal for a monument larger than 640 acres — one square mile — would be subject to a review process: Areas up to 10,000 acres would be subject to review under the National Environmental Policy Act, while those between 10,000 and 85,000 acres would require approval from state and local government. The bill would allow emergency declarations, but they would expire after a year without Congress approval. It would also codify the president’s power to modify monuments — a power that has been contested in light of the Interior Department’s recent recommendations that President Donald Trump reduce the size of several monuments, including Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante in Utah.

Read the full story at High Country News

Fight over national monuments intensifies

October 16, 2017 — WASHINGTON — Conservatives have opened a new front in the fight over the future of America’s national monuments.

House Republicans are moving forward with a bill to reform a century-old conservation law, raising the stakes in their ongoing effort to curtail the president’s’ ability to set aside wide swaths of federal land as national monuments and protect them from future development.

The new legislation, from Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah), comes as the White House mulls reductions to several previously declared monuments. That’s an effort environmentalists consider an affront to the Antiquities Act, a law signed by conservation champion Theodore Roosevelt in 1906.

Conservatives, industry groups and Westerners have long pushed for changes to the Antiquities Act, saying presidents of both parties have abused the law, handcuffing local communities who could look to create jobs on public land. President Trump is an ally in that effort.

Environmentalists and most Democrats consider the Antiquities Act a bedrock American conservation law and have vowed to fight any effort to water it down.

The reform effort has its impetus in what conservatives consider an abuse of federal monument designation powers.

Sixteen presidents have used the Antiquities Act to lock up federal land over the last century. But President Obama used it the most often, and protected by far the most acreage — 553.6 million acres of land and sea monuments — inspiring a fresh round of legislative proposals.

Read the full story at The Hill

Committee Passes Legislation to Require Transparency, Public Input in Antiquities Act

October 12, 2017 — WASHINGTON — The following was released by the House Committee on Natural Resources

Today, the House Committee on Natural Resources passed H.R. 3990, the “National Monument Creation and Protection Act” or the “CAP Act.” Introduced by Chairman Rob Bishop (R-UT), the bill protects archeological resources while ensuring public transparency and accountability in the executive’s use of the Antiquities Act.

“Congress never intended to give one individual the power to unilaterally seize enormous swathes of our nation’s public lands… Our problem isn’t President Obama or President Trump. It’s the underlying law – a statute that provides authority to dictate national monument decisions in secrecy and without public input. The only path to the accountability we all seek – no matter which party controls the White House – is to amend the Act itself,” Bishop stated.

“Under this new, tiered framework, no longer would we have to blindly trust the judgement or fear the whims of any president. The bill ensures a reasonable degree of consultation with local stakeholders and an open public process would be required by law. It strengthens the president’s authority to protect actual antiquities without the threat of disenfranchising people.

“Ultimately, if enacted, it will strengthen the original intent of the law while also providing much needed accountability.”

Click here to view Chairman Bishop’s full opening statement.

Click here to view full markup action.

Click here for more information on H.R. 3990.

Rep. Rob Bishop: Restore the Antiquities Act’s noble vision

October 11, 2017 — In a Tuesday op-ed, I explained the constitutional threat posed by the Antiquities Act, and why its repeated abuse is inconsistent with the constitutional pillars of the rule of law and checks and balances. As it turns out, there’s a reason the Founders chose these principles as the basis of our government: arbitrary rule has no incentive to be accountable to the people that policies affect. Without that accountability, political and ideological manipulation corrodes the balance of power.

Some of the most egregious abuses – the use of the Antiquities Act as a political weapon – happened under President Bill Clinton’s administration.

In 1996, prior to the designation of the Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument in Utah, Clinton’s then-Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality Katie McGinty stated the following, “I’m increasingly of the view that we should just drop these utah [sic] ideas. we [sic] do not really know how the enviros will react and I do think there is a danger of ‘abuse’ of the withdraw/antiquities authorities especially because these lands are not really endangered.”

Could there be any clearer statement of the prioritization of political ideology over the will of people?

The monument was designated in the waning months of Clinton’s re-election campaign. Its total acreage: 1.7 million — three times the size of Rhode Island. No town halls, no public meetings, and no public comment sessions were ever held in Utah. No input was solicited from local stakeholders or land managers in the area. Utah’s governor, congressional delegation, public officials, and residents from across the state all expressed outrage at the lack of prior consultation or warning of the designation. In what feels like symbolism, the proclamation wasn’t even signed in Utah; it was signed in Arizona.

Read the full op-ed at the Washington Examiner

What They Are Saying: Democrats Call for Antiquities Act Transparency

October 11, 2017 — The following was released by the House Committee on Natural Resources through its newsletter The Scope:

If there’s anything we learned from the recent national monument review and decades of Antiquities Act (Act) abuse, it’s that Republicans and Democrats finally want the same thing: transparency and public input in the Act’s uses.

Ironically, for Democrats, it’s also an admission of the underlying problem – a statute that provides the president with unilateral authority to dictate national monument decisions in secrecy and without public input. It’s a recognition that the only path to creating the accountability we all seek – no matter which party controls the White House – is to amend the Act itself.

Thankfully, we have a solution: Chairman Bishop’s “National Monument Creation and Protection Act” or “CAP Act.”

Over the past months, Democrats have gone above and beyond to argue the importance of transparency in the executive’s use of the Act and for local communities to have a voice in the process. Well, we agree.

TRANSPARENCY:

Ranking Member Raul Grijalva (D-AZ): “It has been opaque and it has been contrived.”
Ranking Member Raul Grijalva: “…let’s see some transparency and public accountability.”
Rep. Ruben Kihuen (D-NV): “It’s obviously very, very disappointing in the lack of specificity and transparency.”
Rep. Salud Carbajal (D-CA): “The American people deserve to know what the President’s intentions are.”
Rep. Donald McEachin (D-VA): “[T]he American people deserve transparency and honesty.”
Rep. Madeleine Bordallo (D-Guam): “The people of Guam deserve transparency…”

NOTE: While protecting the chief executive’s authority to designate monuments, the “CAP Act” requires proper environmental review and safeguards for public notice and coordination.

PUBLIC INPUT:

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR): “…should focus on addressing local input…”
Rep. Ruben Kihuen: “This whole process has been a sham. There hasn’t been transparency… listen to the American people.”
Rep. Grace Napolitano (D-CA): “…zero interest in hearing directly from the people who would be most impacted.”
Rep. Grace Napolitano: “…listen to my constituents as well as local stakeholders on what the monument means to our community.”
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-NM): “It doesn’t come as a surprise that local voices were not taken into consideration…”
Sen. Martin Heinrich: “…a sloppy, inaccurate, and Washington-first work product devoid of local engagement. [N]ew Mexicans…are in the dark about what is going to happen…”

NOTE: While protecting the chief executive’s authority to designate monuments, the “CAP Act” requires all county commissions, state legislatures, and Governors in the area to approve of new monuments between 10,000 and 85,000 acres.

POLITICALLY DRIVEN PROCESS:

Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR): “…a politically driven process.”
Rep. Grijalva: “…choosing to appease… special interest friends instead of listening to the American people.”
Sen. Martin Heinrich: “It’s clear this…is a politically driven attempt by Washington.”
Sen. Martin Heinrich: “The public deserves better than predetermined political conclusions based on hearsay and claims that are easily disproven if the department had actually taken the time to listen to and work with local communities.”

NOTE: The “CAP Act” allows the president to make unilateral designations to protect resources under imminent threat while imposing public input requirements for larger monuments. It would end the era of politically motivated land grabs taking place in the dark of night, while restoring the Act’s intent.

Bill proposes curtailing president’s power to create national monuments under Antiquities Act

October 11, 2017 — WASHINGTON — A Utah congressman has introduced a bill that he claims will restore the original intent of the Antiquities Act.

Bill sponsor U.S. Rep. Rob Bishop said the “National Monument Creation and Protection Act” aims to rid the 111-year-old law, which gives presidents the ability to set aside areas to protect their natural, cultural or scientific features, of political manipulation. If passed into law, the bill would severely cut back the president’s unilateral ability to create national monuments.

Bishop, a Republican, also serves as chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, which is scheduled to review the bill Wednesday afternoon.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

Subcommittee Chairmen Respond to Antiquities Act Reform Legislation

October 10, 2017 — WASHINGTON — The following was released by the House Committee on Natural Resources:

Tomorrow, the Committee will markup H.R. 3990, the “National Monument Creation and Protection Act” or “CAP Act.” Introduced by Chairman Rob Bishop (R-UT), the bill protects archeological resources while ensuring public transparency and accountability in the executive’s use of the Antiquities Act.

“The Constitution gives to Congress alone the jurisdiction over public lands. While the executive should be able to move swiftly to protect small archeological sites from imminent threat of looting or desecration, the decision over whether to set aside vast portions of land in perpetuity should only be made after the lengthy debate, public input and accountability that are the unique attributes of the legislative branch,” Subcommittee on Federal Lands Chairman Tom McClintock (R-CA) said.

“Our government works best when it works with the people it serves to accomplish objectives for the common good. For too long, our leaders have not adhered to these principles. The ‘National Monument Creation and Protection Act’ seeks to protect the public’s interests from executive overreach through collaboration with local stakeholders, comprehensive review of monument designations and congressional direction on any future presidential monument reductions. I thank Chairman Bishop for his leadership on this issue and look forward to passage of this important legislation,” Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chairman Bruce Westerman (R-AR) stated.

“When Teddy Roosevelt created the Antiquities Act, his intent was to set aside unique areas of land, not to cutoff millions of acres for the federal government to control that produces no revenue or benefit – all while hurting local governments. Through the years, the abuse of this power has snowballed to a point where President Obama designated more acreage during his Presidency than all other Presidents combined. This process unfairly eliminates local input altogether and severely limits the public’s access to hunting, fishing, and other recreational activities as well as reasonable resource development on their public lands. It is important that the decision to designate or expand national monuments is returned to Congress, where the local citizens and communities can have a say,” Subcommittee on Indian, Insular and Alaska Native Affairs Chairman Doug LaMalfa (R-CA) said.

“This legislation secures a future for locally supported national monuments, checked executive authority, and empowered local governments. The original intent of the Act is upheld and strengthened with measures that bring us into the twenty-first century. I firmly believe this will provide the accountability we need when it comes to protecting our lands,”Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans Chairman Doug Lamborn (R-CO) stated.

“Regardless of political affiliation, presidents on either side of the aisle shouldn’t be able to create massive new national monuments by executive fiat without local public input. It is, after all, the people living near these national monuments that are most affected by their creation. Our nation’s public resources are best managed when the people that use those lands are intimately involved in the process. Chairman Bishop’s ‘National Monument Creation and Protection Act’ protects private property rights and empowers local stakeholders while also including important clarifying definitions that should have been included in the original law. I am grateful for his strong leadership on this issue and am proud to be a cosponsor,” Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources Chairman Paul Gosar (R-AZ) said.

« Previous Page
1
…
3
4
5
6
7
…
17
Next Page »